Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light from the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Florida State University Law Review Volume 31 Issue 1 Article 5 2003 Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One Román Ortega-Cowan [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Román Ortega-Cowan, Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One, 31 Fla. St. U. L. Rev. (2003) . https://ir.law.fsu.edu/lr/vol31/iss1/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Florida State University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW DUBIOUS MEANS TO FINAL SOLUTIONS: EXTRACTING LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS OF EIN FÜHRER AND BROTHER NUMBER ONE Román Ortega-Cowan VOLUME 31 FALL 2003 NUMBER 1 Recommended citation: Román Ortega-Cowan, Dubious Means to Final Solutions: Extracting Light From the Darkness of Ein Führer and Brother Number One, 31 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 163 (2003). DUBIOUS MEANS TO FINAL SOLUTIONS: EXTRACTING LIGHT FROM THE DARKNESS OF EIN FÜHRER AND BROTHER NUMBER ONE ROMÁN ORTEGA-COWAN* I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 164 II. TUNING THE PIANO ........................................................................................... 165 A. The Players: The German Nazis and Cambodian Khmer Rouge .............. 165 B. A Single Word, Eternal Dread: Genocide................................................... 166 1. Lemkin’s Quest..................................................................................... 166 2. Room for One More: Political Groups .................................................. 168 C. Turning Principles into Action: The Legal System .................................... 170 III. EIN FÜHRER: HITLER’S NAZI GERMANY ............................................................ 170 A. Rise: In the Name of National Security ..................................................... 171 B. Building the Wall ....................................................................................... 172 C. The Nuremberg Laws................................................................................. 173 1. Drawing Lines...................................................................................... 174 2. Defining Mischlinge............................................................................. 176 D. The Kristallnacht Decrees .......................................................................... 177 E. Laying the Foundation for the Final Solution........................................... 179 IV. BROTHER NUMBER ONE: POL POT’S DEMOCRATIC KAMPUCHEA ....................... 179 A. Rise: In the Name of Liberation ................................................................. 180 B. Year Zero .................................................................................................... 181 1. Pol Pot’s Eight Points........................................................................... 182 2. The Constitution of Democratic Kampuchea ....................................... 182 C. Fumbling Towards Utopia......................................................................... 185 1. Minutes from a Center Meeting ........................................................... 185 2. Excerpts from Pol Pot’s Speech to a Zone Assembly ............................ 186 3. The Four-Year Plan ............................................................................. 187 D. Implosion.................................................................................................... 188 V. EXTRACTING LIGHT FROM DARKNESS................................................................ 189 A. Disparity in Ideology.................................................................................. 189 1. Institution—Nazis................................................................................ 189 2. Revolution—Khmer Rouge................................................................... 190 B. Diversity of Enemy ..................................................................................... 191 1. Picking Out the Rotten Fruit—Nazis................................................... 191 2. Overturning the Basket—Khmer Rouge .............................................. 191 VI. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 192 The imagination and strength of Shakespeare’s evildoers stopped short at a dozen corpses because they had no ideology.1 * B.A. Boston College, 2000; J.D., with honors, Florida State University College of Law, 2003. Special thanks to the Pillar (Chenell Garrido) and the Foundation (Rob Atkin- son). Thanks to Tahirih Lee, Terry Coonan, Sandy D’Alemberte, Fernando Tesón, Mark Ellis, and Steven Gey. 1. ALEXANDR L. SOLZHENITSYN, THE GULAG ARCHIPELAGO: 1918-56, at 173-74 (Tho- mas P. Whitney trans., 1973). 164 FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 31:163 The Nazis used a legal system to commit genocide; the Khmer Rouge did not. What may seem an insignificant statement, consider- ing the horror of the end results has often overshadowed any focus on methodology, in fact holds the key to a better understanding of hu- manity’s greatest evil. Exploring both the fact of this difference as well as the reasons for its existence presents a focus on the roots as well as the branches, maximizing comprehension of the greater prob- lem of genocide. Analysis reveals the differences were based on dis- parity in ideology as well as diversity of enemy, and the striking similarity of the horror caused despite such differences. I. INTRODUCTION In any analysis, two questions arise. First, why is this undertak- ing of interest? The novel comparison of two very different perpetra- tors of genocide is necessary to help the world to realize the poorly understood how of humanity’s greatest evil as opposed to the more fully explored ethical why. Second, how is it helpful? In showing how regimes borne of opposite ideologies and targeting different enemies, yet united by genocidal pursuits, can lead to the same dreadful re- sults, it shall aid human rights advocates in the early recognition of genocide and in arguing that political groups should be included in its definition. When considering human atrocity, many wish to dismiss its per- petrators as inhuman rather than face the possibility that something entirely human led to such horror.2 Indeed, some may object to the exploration of the methods employed by architects of genocide as giv- ing them a human face, rather choosing to dismiss them as monsters. Such dismissal is dreadful, for to give meaning to the words “never again” we must uphold our duty to break the causal chain as early as possible. To do so we must employ knowledge and action in the face of banality. Part II sets out and defines the terms and concepts of this analy- sis, explaining why the Nazis and Khmer Rouge are used, as well as giving special treatment to the definition of genocide (detailed ex- 2. In fact, perhaps the most shocking feature of the Holocaust and other atrocities was the critical role played by entirely human traits. See HANNAH ARENDT, EICHMANN IN JERUSALEM: A REPORT ON THE BANALITY OF EVIL (rev. & enlarged ed., Penguin Books 1983) (describing the role bureaucracy played in the Holocaust); SOLZHENITSYN, supra note 1, at 168: If only it were so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. it is after all only because of the way things worked out that they were the executioners and we weren’t. 2003] EIN FÜHRER AND BROTHER NUMBER ONE 165 amination is required due to inherent difficulties in defining the term). Part III briefly describes the Nazi regime and provides a syn- opsis of the major legal documents used in committing legal genocide against the Jews. Part IV briefly describes the Khmer Rouge regime and provides a synopsis of the major political documents shedding light on its ideology of committing extra-legal genocide against ene- mies of the state. Part V explains why the Nazis used a legal system and the Khmer Rouge used extra-legal means to commit genocide and what can be learned from this difference in light of the similar results. Finally, Part VI concludes the analysis. II. TUNING THE PIANO3 The first step to any argument is also the most essential: the defi- nition of terms. What follows is a synopsis of the contextual meaning of this exercise’s critical terms and concepts. A. The Players: The German Nazis and Cambodian Khmer Rouge One has many regimes to choose from in constructing a compara- tive analysis of perpetrators of genocide—above all, the Nazis and Khmer Rouge stand out. Their differences are striking, yet their qualities may be reduced to where the two appear almost identical. Employing ideologies reaching opposite ends of the political spec- trum, each regime delivered a most sinister dictator: the Nazis were ruled by the iron fist of Ein Führer4 (Adolf Hitler), the Khmer Rouge 5 by the shrouded talon of Brother Number One (Pol Pot). 3. See JOHN BARTH, THE FLOATING OPERA 7-14 (1956). In other words, setting out and defining